 |
||
|
|
||
|
||
|
|
||
EDUCATION GUARANTEE SCHEME AND ALTERNATIVE & INNOVATIVE EDUCATION
|
9. Implementation arrangements The EGS & AIE would
function within the overall framework of the SSA.
Till SSA becomes fully operational, separate management structures
for EGS & AIE could be established for supervision and monitoring of
the scheme. Later, it is
expected that personnel for implementation and monitoring of EGS & AIE
(the state run component) would form a part of the SSA management
structure. For VA run centres,
project management structure and costs would be allowed as per the norms
presented later in the section on financial norms and units costs.
The EGS & AIE/SSA organised arrangement at state, district and
block levels would coordinate the work of VAs also. Outlined below is the management structure (for state-run centres) envisaged for EGS and AIE at various levels which could undergo modifications once the staffing for SSA is finalised. In DPEP districts, the management structure at district level would have to take into account the existing personnel available at the District Project Office. The EGS & AIE would not be implemented by an arrangement that is completely separated from the arrangements for implementation of the Alternative Schooling (AS) component of DPEP. 9.1 Habitation / Village Level : A school
committee/Mothers’ group/Village Education Committee/Gram Panchayat
would be given the responsibility of management of the EGS & AIE
centres. Their responsibilities should be clearly detailed in the MOU to
be signed by the VEC/PRI with the block/district level representatives of
the State Implementing Society. Funds
for honorarium of the teacher, teaching-learning equipment and centre
contingency would be transferred to the bank account of the VEC/panchayat
in advance. The Local Committee/VEC/Gram Panchayat would make payments to
the teacher and incur other expenditure as per norms. The Committee would
maintain simple accounts for this purpose and submit utilisation
certificates to the block/district office. 9.2
Cluster Level : A
cluster will comprise
of 20 EGS & AIE centres/bridge courses/camps. A CRP would be
responsible for:
Since EGS schools would be more like formal schools
and in most states would follow the formal schools curriculum, it would be
appropriate to use existing BRC-CRC structures in project (DPEP,LJP, GOI-UN)
districts (and in SSA districts whenever these become functional) for
academic support and monitoring of the EGS schools.
The headmaster of the nearest primary school may also be given some
responsibility for guidance/supervision of EGS schools.
This would be especially important where EGS schools have been
conceptualised as feeder schools to the nearby primary schools. In
districts currently not covered under DPEP or SSA and till BRCs and CRCs
become functional strengthening of block education office may be
considered under the scheme for looking
after the additional EGS schools.
For other kinds of interventions it would be important to have
additional personnel for academic support and supervision.
For mainstreaming strategies like bridge courses and back to school
camps also the involvement of head masters and CRC-BRC would be crucial
since the children have to be admitted to formal primary schools.
But additional CRPs (local motivated youth) could greatly help in a
more intensive supervision of these programmes and maintain close contact
with the headmasters in districts where such structures exist. In certain strategies for very difficult groups, more
community contact and regular supervision would be required, separate CRPs should be engaged for such centres.
Thus, CRPs could be placed for support of a smaller
number of centres (say 10 centres) in innovative strategies.
This would be possible within overall cost ceiling since the EGS
component may not require too many additional CRPs.
There is therefore scope
for flexibility in the arrangement through which cluster (10-20 centres)
level academic support and supervision could be organised within the
overall financial allocation for project management cost which included
the costs for academic support supervision.
9.3
Block Level Organisation : The earlier NFE scheme
provided for a project management structure for every 100 centres, which
was often, but not always coterminous with a development / education
block. The main work of this office was administrative in nature relating
to selection and appointment of instructors & supervisors, preparation
of monthly bills for instructors & supervisors, TA/DA etc. Since the
selection process and payment of Education Volunteers is now proposed to
be decentralised to the VEC / Panchayat, the requirement of administrative
& accounting work at the block level would be reduced. It is envisaged in the
SSA pattern that the Block Education Office / Block Panchayat Samiti would
be responsible for all UEE schemes & activities including the
interventions for ‘out of school’ children under EGS & AIE. It is therefore advisable that the project structure under EGS & AIE
is made coterminous with the educational block.
The block level committee (proposed under SSA) would also guide the
implementation of EGS & AIE. A
separate committee for EGS & AIE maybe formed till the SSA structures
are in place. The personnel to be provided at the block level would depend
on the number of EGS & AIE centres in that block and the need for
academic support & mainstreaming. If a majority of the centres are EGS
– like schools where academic support could be provided as a
part of the BRC – CRC arrangement (already created in DPEP
districts or which may be proposed under SSA in non DPEP districts), EGS
& AIE could simply provide an additional Block Resource Person at the
BRC, if necessary. If it is felt that the specific needs of EGS & AIE
require a monitoring & support arrangement that is separate, then
additional personnel may be provided (under the overall supervision of the
BEO) as per requirement. A
Block Resource Group (BRG) may be constituted to provide academic &
implementation support to the scheme. The personnel to be provided at the
block level for supervision and monitoring of EGS & AIE scheme could
be decided by the State Government within the overall financial limits
which are indicated in a separate section. Whatever arrangement is
finalised for support to EGS & AIE interventions at block level it
must be ensured that there is regular guidance to the CRPs and support is
organised from the block level for the monthly meeting of Education
Volunteers at the cluster level. The provision for costs for the monthly
meetings at the cluster level should be made out of the block
management costs under EGS & AIE. The requirement of staff like
accounts clerk and messenger should be finalised based on availability of
fund under block management and also the staffing pattern that is
finalised under SSA. The block level
programme management would be responsible for:
9.4
District Level Organisation : It is expected that the
administrative arrangements for SSA at district level would also cover EGS
& AIE. However, till such time as such arrangements are finalised,
there would be a District Advisory Committee headed by the District
Collector or the Chief Executive Officer of Zilla Parishad as the State
Government may decide. Representatives
of VAs and PRIs, representatives of DIETs , Project Officers of EGS and
AIE, Education Volunteers and eductionists would be its members. This committee would review and guide the implementation of
the programme and interact with other social sector departments and
agencies to find maximum areas of convergence. The existing administrative arrangements in the ten educationally backward states and a few other states where the state run NFE programme is being implemented in selected areas may need to be modified to ensure that the district level organisation for EGS and AIE works closely with the District Elementary Education structures. Since, the EGS & AIE is an important component of the overall UEE effort, there has to be unified organisation at the district level to look at all children in the age of 6-14 years, their enrolment and retention in formal schools, EGS schools, bridge courses etc. The consolidation of results of micro-planning exercises would also have to be done in one place to provide a comprehensive picture of all children who are currently enrolled in schools and those who are not going to schools. 9.5
State Level Organisation : All states receiving
funds under EGS & AIE would be expected to entrust the responsibility
of routing funds and overall coordination of the scheme to an existing
state level society. As
mentioned earlier, since EGS and AIE would form a part of the SSA, it is
appropriate that the society formed or identified for implementation of
SSA is also made responsible at the state level for EGS and AIE. Identification
of the state society will have to be finalised by the State Government
prior to taking up any other activities under EGS and AIE.
The state society would receive central share and state share for
EGS and AIE, disburse funds for state run projects as well as grants in
aid to VAs, appraise and approve the district level proposals
received from the district committees for EGS & AIE. The structure
of the state office responsible for implementation and supervision of EGS
& AIE would have to be finalised by each state quickly. A state level
appraisal team should be constituted to appraise the district level EGS
& AIE plans. It would be also useful to constitute a State
Resource Group (SRG) to advise and guide the implementation especially
the academic aspects. The SRG could undertake periodic visits (with the
involvement of more institutions/individuals) to the districts to monitor
the programme implementation. Such review and monitoring visits would help
provide valuable feedback for corrective action on academic and
administrative matters. District proposals for `out of school’ children
will form a part of the District Elementary Education Plan (DEEP) once SSA
is operational in the district concerned, and would be appraised as a part
of the appraisal of these plans. The
VA proposals would also form a part of the district EGS & AIE
proposals and DEEP. The state
society should constitute a Grants-in-aid Committee (GIAC) to examine the
VA proposals on the parameters of:
The GIAC should include
representatives of different directorates of the education department,
representative of finance department and a few VAs. The Executive Committee
of the state level society and the GIAC would include a representative of
the Government of India. The GIAC would also include one non-official
representative of the GOI. The existing arrangement for coordination of
the NFE scheme would need to be integrated with the state society made
responsible for UEE. This would require some changes in the structural
arrangements at the state level (and district level as indicated earlier).
The management costs that can be allocated under EGS and AIE scheme
at the district and state level are indicated in a later section on
financial norms. The state society would
also be responsible for:
9.6
Natioanl Level Organisation :
9.6.1
At the national level, the proposed Sarva Siksha Abhiyan Mission
would also oversee the implementation of EGE & AIE. The Mission would
have an Executive Committee and Governing Council. Since the proposal for
Experimental and Innovative projects and DRUs would continue to be funded
directly by the centre, there would be a Grant-in-Aid Committee for such
projects constituted by the Department of Elementary Education and
Literacy. 9.6.2
For scrutiny of state
proposals which would have already been appraised by the state societies,
a small Core Group would be constituted consisting of Joint Secretary
(Elementary Education) Deputy Secretary /Director (NFE), representative of
NCERT, and one or two persons
with relevant experience to be nominated by the JS (EE)
This Core Group will be responsible for according final approval to
the proposals from the states including the proposals of VAs which would
be incorporated as a part of the district-wise proposals.
This Group would be responsible for ensuring that the proposals
sent by the state are in accordance with these guidelines and that due
processes have been followed in the preparation of the plans. It would
also be the task of the Group to suggest modification of strategies
proposed by the state and suggest other strategies that could be adopted
based on successful programmes and projects.
The Core Group could also suggest and arrange for orientation and
exposure visits for state and district personnel responsible for planning
and implementation EGS & AIE. The
DS/Director Incharge of EGS & AIE would function as the member
secretary of the Core Group. The
Core Group would also be responsible for arranging for review and
monitoring of the state EGS & AIE programmes through frequent visits
of resource persons and representatives of organisation/institution on a
regular basis. 9.6.3
A detailed framework of monitoring and evaluation on a regular
basis is being worked out at the national level. The Core Group at the
national level would take up with the state societies various issues
brought out by the visiting monitoring teams. The Core Group or Deputy
Secretary/Director incharge of EGS & AIE would review the corrective
action taken by the State based on the report of monitoring
visits/evaluations. 9.6.4
The present arrangement of a Grants-in-Aid Committee to discuss VA
proposals for Innovative and Experimental projects would continue.
|
||
